Skip to content

· Private foundation

Neshotah Charitable Foundation Inc

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$13k
Granted FY2025still arriving
20
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$1k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2025.

Recreation & Sports$10kHealth$7kHuman Services$5kHousing & Shelter$3kPublic Benefit$3kYouth Development$3kArts & Culture$2kCrime & Legal$2kOther$0
02FY2025 · 20 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$500
Median grant
1
States reached
$103k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Take Note Studio$1,100
Alano Society$1,100
Ascend Services$1,100
St Vincent DePaul Society$1,000
Hear the Rohrer Cooking Class$1,000
Magic Mishicot Athletic Complex$1,000
CASA of East Central Wiscosin$750
Jefferson Elementary ParentFamily Solutions Team$550
Salvation Army$500
Lighthouse Recovery Complex Center$500
TRHSTwo Rivers Optimist Club Family Assistance Fund$500
Hope House$500
Camp Tapawingo$500
American Legion Auxiliary Badger Girls State$500
Shop with a Cop Two Rivers Two Rivers Police Department$500
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY24–24, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%Lakeshore Foster Families and Friends: $1k → 11%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

35%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$14k · 10 repeat orgs$26k to everyone else

10 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 13 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
25

Total granted

$14k
$17k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-109%
+8%

Still filing today

10%
16%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 27% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’21’22’23’24’25
EducationHuman ServicesArts & CultureEnvironmentHousing & ShelterHealthOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as new. Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.

Backed again, and grew

  • CT
    Camp Tapawingo
    3× · 2023–2025 · $5k
  • HH
    Hope House
    4× · 2021–2025 · $2k
  • SA
    Salvation Army
    3× · 2023–2025 · $2k

Funded once

  • TR
    Two Rivers Parks & Recreation
    one grant, 2024 · $2k
  • V
    Various
    one grant, 2022 · $2k
  • LF
    LAKESHORE FOSTER FAMILIES AND FRIENDS INC
    one grant, 2024 · $1k
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Hope House of Manitowoc County Inc

Helping families and individuals experiencing homelessness achieve sustainable independence.

Human Services
2
Little Forest School Inc

Childcare

—
3
Wisconsin Casa Association

Wisconsin court appointed special advocates (casa) association champions the needs of abused and neglected children by supporting and expanding local casa programs.

Crime & Legal
4
Casa of Kosciusko County Inc

Casa is committed to speaking in the best interest of children, who are at risk for abuse and neglect. casa recruits, trains, & supports volunteers to serve at-risk children in the family court system.

Civil Rights
5
House of Hope Green Bay Inc

House of hope green bay provides a safe and supportive place where youth and young families with children experiencing homelessness will be come confident, independent, and successful members of our community. house of hope envisions a…

—
6
Timber Lake Playhouse

The mission of timber lake playhouse is to provide the best expression of theater arts to the regional community by presenting creative works that entertain and inspire.

Arts & Culture
7
Haven House

To guide and support families who face homelessness on their paths to stable homes.

Housing & Shelter
8
Casa for Kids Inc

The mission of casa for kids, inc. is to provide volunteer advocates to work independently for the best interest of each child service coming under the jurisdiction of michigan barry, eaton, and ingham county courts due to abuse and…

Civil Rights
9
Manitowoc County Habitat for Humanity Inc

To create decent, affordable housing for those in need

—
10
Casa of St Croix County Inc

Our mission is to advocate for abused and neglected children who are under court supervision in st. croix county with the goal of helping each child secure a safe and permanent home. we want each child to have a voice and a hopeful future.…

Human Services
11
Kaukauna Kinder Haus Inc

To provide safe, educational, quality care for children.

Human Services
12
Manitowoc County Domestic Violence Center Inc

To provide shelter, crisis intervention, and supportive services for survivors of domestic and sexual abuse and their families, with a commitment to safety, respect and promoting self-determination.

Crime & Legal
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Casa of East Central Wisconsin; the most unlike its peers is Kites Over Lake Michigan Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

9 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 9 of the 48 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
4/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Camp Tapawingo: $4,804 · OtherCamp TapawingoTwo Rivers Parks & Recreation: $2,000 · OtherTwo Rivers Parks & RecreationHope House: $1,600 · OtherSalvation Army: $1,500 · OtherKites Over Lake Michigan Inc: $1,500 · OtherVarious: $1,500 · Other+34 more: $20,500 · Other+34 moreTAKE NOTE STUDIO INC: $1,100 · EducationALANO SOCIETY INC: $1,100 · EducationLAKESHORE FOSTER FAMILIES AND FRIENDS INC: $1,100 · Human ServicesASCEND SERVICES INC: $1,100 · HealthTREEHOUSE THEATER INC: $1,100 · Arts & CultureWOODLAND DUNES NATURE CENTER AND PRESERVE INC: $940 · EnvironmentCASA OF EAST CENTRAL WISCONSIN: $750 · Crime & LegalTHE HAVEN OF MANITOWOC COUNTY INC: $250 · Housing & Shelter
Other$33,404Education$2,200Human Services$1,100Health$1,100Arts & Culture$1,100Environment$940Crime & Legal$750Housing & Shelter$250

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetKites Over Lake Michigan Inc: $1,500 over 4y, 2.9% of budgetTAKE NOTE STUDIO INC: $1,100 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTREEHOUSE THEATER INC: $1,100 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetALANO SOCIETY INC: $1,100 over 1y, 3.9% of budgetWOODLAND DUNES NATURE CENTER AND PRESERVE INC: $940 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE HAVEN OF MANITOWOC COUNTY INC: $250 over 1y, 0.1% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

  • Who funds Kites Over Lake Michigan Inc ↗
  • Who funds LAKESHORE FOSTER FAMILIES AND FRIENDS INC ↗
  • Who funds TAKE NOTE STUDIO INC ↗
  • Who funds ASCEND SERVICES INC ↗
  • Who funds TREEHOUSE THEATER INC ↗
  • Who funds ALANO SOCIETY INC ↗
  • Who funds WOODLAND DUNES NATURE CENTER AND PRESERVE INC ↗
  • Who funds CASA OF EAST CENTRAL WISCONSIN ↗

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Ruth St John & John Dunham West Foundation IncWI24.2× affinity9 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Ruth St John & John Dunham West Foundation Inc · Harold C Kallies Charitable Trust 32f003019 · Jane & Arthur Stangel Fund Inc · Lakeshore Community Foundation Inc · Green Bay Packers Foundation · Wisconsin Public Service Foundation · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Neshotah Charitable Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Neshotah Charitable Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12 to 24 months.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Neshotah Charitable Foundation Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Neshotah Charitable Foundation Inc through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 48 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Neshotah’s filings →

    More from the funding graph